Jonathan P. Park

Hepatosplenic αβ T-cell lyrnphomas: A report of 14 cases and comparison with hepatosplenic γδ T-cell lymphomas

Hepatosplenic gammadelta T-cell lymphoma is a distinct entity, characterized by occurrence in young adult males with hepatosplenomegaly, B-symptoms, peripheral blood cytopenias, and no lymphadenopathy; lymphomatous infiltrates in the splenic red pulp, hepatic sinusoids, and bone marrow sinuses; T-cell receptor (TCR) gammadelta chains and a cytotoxic T-cell phenotype; isochromosome 7q; and an aggressive clinical course. In comparison, this study describes the clinicopathologic features of 14 hepatosplenic T-cell lymphomas expressing TCR alphabeta chains. They occurred in 11 women and 3 men with a median age of 36 years. Clinical presentation was similar to that described previously for hepatosplenic gammadelta T-cell lymphomas, except for the female preponderance and age distribution (5 patients younger than 13 years of age and 5 patients older than 50 years of age). Disease distribution was primarily in the splenic red pulp and hepatic sinusoids, although liver infiltrates were largely periportal in four cases. Bone marrow involvement, observed in eight patients, was usually interstitial and/or within the sinuses. Lymph nodes were involved in five patients, although lymphadenopathy was demonstrable in only two. Ten cases were composed of intermediate-size tumor cells with round/oval nuclei, slightly dispersed chromatin, inconspicuous nucleoli, and scant to moderate amounts of cytoplasm. Four lymphomas contained primarily large cells with irregular nuclei, dispersed chromatin, discernible nucleoli, and moderate to abundant cytoplasm. Tumor cells in all 14 lymphomas were cytotoxic alphabeta T-cells; 13 co-expressed natural killer cell-associated antigens and showed T-cell clonality. Three lymphomas were associated with Epstein-Barr virus. Two of four cases had an isochromosome 7q. Eleven patients are dead, eight within a year of diagnosis, and two patients have maintained complete remissions after combination chemotherapy. These data show that hepatosplenic T-cell lymphomas include an alphabeta-subtype. This group, along with the previously recognized gammadelta group, should be recognized as phenotypically heterogeneous subtypes of the same disease entity.

Free proximal trisomy 21 without the Down syndrome

Analysis of partial duplication of chromosome 21 suggests that band 21q22 contains determinants for the Down syndrome. We report two cases of free proximal trisomy 21 without manifestations of the Down syndrome. Phenotypic anomalies included marked microcephaly, short stature, hypoplastic nails, and mental retardation/developmental delay. Our cases are consistent with the assignment of band 21q22 as the causal duplicated segment in the Down syndrome.

A de novo interstitial deletion of chromosome 6 (q22.2q23.1)

A unique interstitial deletion of the long arm of chromosome 6 involving bands q22.2 and q23.1 was observed in a patient referred for craniostenosis and developmental delay. The associated phenotypic anomalies are compared with other reported cases of deletion 6q involving adjacent regions.

Proficiency Testing for Laboratories Performing Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization With Chromosome-Specific DNA Probes

OBJECTIVE To assess laboratory performance, use, and limitations in the joint College of American Pathologists and American College of Medical Genetics proficiency testing program for laboratories performing cytogenetic tests based on fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH). DATA SOURCES Eight proficiency surveys dealing with FISH detection of microdeletions or microduplications, aneuploidy in interphase cells, gene amplification, and neoplasm-specific translocations. Participating laboratories used their own DNA probes (commercial or home-brew), hybridization methods, and analytic criteria to answer clinical questions about cases represented by slides included in the survey materials. They also described their test results according to the International System for Human Cytogenetic Nomenclature (ISCN) and answered supplementary questions relating to their experience with the subject test systems. DATA EXTRACTION In addition to evaluating diagnostic accuracy, we evaluated survey use, laboratory experience, variation in methodologic approach, and the practicality of using ISCN nomenclature for describing test results. SYNTHESIS AND CONCLUSIONS With the exception of one challenge, at least 80% of the participants reached the correct diagnostic conclusion. In the sole exception, there was still a consensus of 91.7% of participants with the same (albeit erroneous) diagnostic conclusion. The overall outstanding performance of participating laboratories clearly shows the reliability of current FISH methods. Despite the fact that a large number of laboratories reported little or no experience with the specific test systems, the overwhelming majority performed very well. This result shows that the programs strategy of targeting classes of abnormalities (vs a single abnormality associated with a specific disease) did not put at a disadvantage participants who did not routinely perform all of the potential tests in the class. The extraordinary variation in ISCN descriptions submitted by participants showed that the existing system for human cytogenetic nomenclature is not suitable for facile communication of FISH test results.

Trisomy 18 and 18p‐ features in a case of isochromosome 18q [46,XY,i(18q)]: prenatal diagnosis and autopsy report

This paper reports the prenatal diagnosis and autopsy findings of a case of true isochromosome 18q [46,XY,i(18q)] with severe cephalic malformations. Comparison is made with other cases of i(18q).

College of American Pathologists/American College of Medical Genetics proficiency testing for constitutional cytogenomic microarray analysis

Purpose: To evaluate the feasibility of administering a newly established proficiency test offered through the College of American Pathologists and the American College of Medical Genetics for genomic copy number assessment by microarray analysis, and to determine the reproducibility and concordance among laboratory results from this test.Methods: Surveys were designed through the Cytogenetic Resource Committee of the two colleges to assess the ability of testing laboratories to process DNA samples provided and interpret results. Supplemental questions were asked with each Survey to determine laboratory practice trends.Results: Twelve DNA specimens, representing 2 pilot and 10 Survey challenges, were distributed to as many as 74 different laboratories, yielding 493 individual responses. The mean consensus for matching result interpretations was 95.7%. Responses to supplemental questions indicate that the number of laboratories offering this testing is increasing, methods for analysis and evaluation are becoming standardized, and array platforms used are increasing in probe density.Conclusion: The College of American Pathologists/American College of Medical Genetics proficiency testing program for copy number assessment by cytogenomic microarray is a successful and efficient mechanism for assessing interlaboratory reproducibility. This will provide laboratories the opportunity to evaluate their performance and assure overall accuracy of patient results. The high level of concordance in laboratory responses across all testing platforms by multiple facilities highlights the robustness of this technology.

Extensive Analysis of Mosaicism in a Case of Turner Syndrome The Experience of 287 Cytogenetic Laboratories

OBJECTIVE To assemble and interpret karyotype data provided as part of the College of American Pathologists/American College of Medical Genetics Cytogenetics Proficiency Testing Program. DATA SOURCES, EXTRACTION, AND SYNTHESIS The Cytogenetics Resource Committee requested data on all cells analyzed in a 1994 whole-blood specimen challenge. In that study, 287 participating laboratories analyzed a total of 14297 cells derived from a sample drawn from an adult donor with Turner syndrome. This individual had previously been found to have mosaicism, including cell lines with X structural anomalies along with monosomy X, making this an excellent challenge for a multicenter cytogenetic survey. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS Analysis of the data from this extensive study revealed mosaicism of up to 10 different sex chromosome complements involving the X chromosome with and without a small ring X or a derivative X chromosome. In the routine cytogenetic analysis performed by the participating laboratories, cell lines observed, in decreasing order of prevalence, included 45,X (n = 8357 cells), 46,X,r(X) (n = 3597), 46,X,der(X)t(X;X) (n = 2237), 46,XX (n = 93), 47,X,r(X),r(X) (n = 5), 47,X,der (X)t(X;X),der(X)t(X;X) (n = 3), 47,XX,r(X) (n = 2), and one observation each of 47,XX,der(X)t(X;X), 47,X,der(X)t (X;X),r(X), and 47,XXX. Our molecular cytogenetic data, as well as detailed analysis of G-banded chromosomes, suggest the nomenclature for these 2 abnormal X chromosomes as r(X)(p11.3q21.3) and der(X)t(X;X)(p11.3;q21.3), and we discuss models for the concomitant formation of these 2 entities. Both the degree of analysis and the extensive mosaicism that was discovered in this study are exceptional, and similar reported cases as well as possible mechanisms for the observed X chromosome instability are reviewed.

As currently formulated, ISCN FISH nomenclature make it not practical for use in clinical test reports or cytogenetic databases

Purpose To assess the extent and the sources of variation in ISCN nomenclature used by participants in CAP/ACMG surveys dealing with fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH).Methods Over 1600 nomenclature strings from 15 challenges in seven surveys were evaluated for the contributions of diagnostic errors, syntax errors, methodological differences, and technical factors not foreseen by ISCN 1995.Results Although diagnostic errors were uncommon, syntax errors were numerous, approaching 50% of the responses for several challenges. Their frequency varied with the complexity of the nomenclature required to describe a test condition. Variation attributable to probe selection and band designation correlated with the number of probes available for addressing the diagnostic issue at hand. In the most dramatic example of this effect, a survey simulating diagnosis of trisomy 21 in uncultured amniocytes, there were 66 participants (of 99) who used the same general form for their nomenclature, but only 8 of the 66 had exactly the same nomenclature string. Participants used proprietary names, created their own nomenclature, or ignored the true complexity of probe systems when trying to describe conditions not foreseen by ISCN 1995.Conclusion The use of current ISCN FISH nomenclature resulted in survey participants describing unique biological conditions in a multitude of different ways. In addition to making the nomenclature unsuitable for proficiency test purposes, this heterogeneity makes it impractical for clinical test reporting and for cytogenetic database management. Because methodological information contributes a large amount of variability, adds complexity, and increases opportunities for syntax errors, a system that excludes such information would be more effective.